What is Digg?Related by Keyword 
How are these related stories? Tell us!
- BigBadger, on 10/11/2007, -10/+71Well isn't that special.
Little Novell is learning the hard way that, when you sleep with pigs, you'll indeed get covered in *****.- TKDWILSON, on 10/11/2007, -20/+3Novell should work with Microsoft. They just need to not compromise with them. It is good for Linux for greater compatibility with Microsoft, PLUS in the short term, it is good for Microsoft, POSSIBLY in the long term too.
Eric Wilson - jrsims, on 10/11/2007, -3/+23Yeah, not interested in hearing from Novell at this point. They've become part of the problem.
- xgunterx, on 10/11/2007, -12/+3Novell took a reasonable decision to make a deal with MS from a business standpoint. Novell never admitted there are infringements in the Linux code.
'If' there are infringements are not, that is up to the courts to decide. Before that, they are 'potential or possible' infringements.
But litigation costs money, also for the defender even if the claims are bogus. If they didn't took the deal, there would always have been the uncertainty wether MS would go after them and MS has deeper pockets.
They are protecting only there users, well so is Redhat with there indemnification.
It's not there fault that the US patent system is so ***** up.
Besides, this patent clause was only one part of the deal. What really was there goal is to get a better interoperability with the products from MS.
Now Novell seems to be the pariah of the OSS community, but if they had not signed the deals, they would have been the ultimate heroes considering the SCO-Novell or the SCO-Linux litigation.
Get real.
From a SUSE user since version 7.0. - init100, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6"when you sleep with pigs, you'll indeed get covered in *****."
Or
"If you sleep with the devil, don't be surprised if you wake up in hell." - SVPirate, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5I think this is very interesting. I think Novell's chief has just realised that even though they signed an indemnity with Microsoft, Microsoft have still turned round and badmouthed FOSS and Linux, which is a large part of Novell's business model. They thought they'd got into bed with the top dog and protected their asses from being damaged by Microsoft. Instead it was a one night stand, and they got shafted, just like everyone else that signed into Microsoft's crooked 'license' scheme. I expect Sun are non-too-impressed with this stance on FOSS, neither will IBM be, both are Microsoft patent license holders AFAIK.
Microsoft are FUD-ing again. I won't buy any of this ***** until someone puts the patent numbers and details in front of the FOSS community to examine in detail. - BlackAdderIII, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Nobody wants to buy legal protection from a company that allows its products to be publicly slandered all over the place.
Hell, Novell isn't just failing to sue them, it's staying in an agreement with them on patents!
That legal protection has no value.
PS: Eventually business will cotton on to that one, Novell. - rpgmaker, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4"Novell rejects Microsoft’s Linux patent claims"
Too little, TOO late. Novell is the cause of this problem.
***** Novell.... and RIAA.
- TKDWILSON, on 10/11/2007, -20/+3Novell should work with Microsoft. They just need to not compromise with them. It is good for Linux for greater compatibility with Microsoft, PLUS in the short term, it is good for Microsoft, POSSIBLY in the long term too.
- KevinJim, on 10/11/2007, -12/+47***** off Novell, you've done the *****, learn to live with it.
- schestowitz, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3There are contradictions in Novell's argument here. See:
http://boycottnovell.com/2007/05/15/story-contradicts/
"We have three options here:
* Microsoft may be changing the story it tells;
* Novell is simply not being honest;
* or it is just a case of flawed journalism"
I don't trust Novell and this reply from them is typical PR pitch. - yoyar, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3***** off Novell, indeed.
- MacSuxWindozSux, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1***** off Novell.
- schestowitz, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3There are contradictions in Novell's argument here. See:
- CarzorStelatis, on 10/11/2007, -8/+33So why exactly have they agreed a deal with Microsoft under which the latter promises not to sue Novell for 'patent infringement' in SuSe?
Digg Rule #234: anything said by anyone who works for Novell gets buried as lame.- lnappropriate, on 10/11/2007, -11/+0Is that related to rule 34?
- venom8599, on 10/11/2007, -3/+13Probably so that they got the patent cross-licensing deal with Microsoft, in exchange for a minimum of $40,000,000 (based on their Linux revenue, but min. $40,000,000) in exchange for a "balancing" payment of ~$100,000,000 from Microsoft, since Microsoft's products and patents bring in more money than Novell's own patents. So you're looking at the potential for a $60,000,000 windfall... If you were in Novell's shoes you'd be an idiot to decline this from a financial standpoint.
@lnappropriate
While on the subject of rules, you might want to remember rules 1 & 2. - cyberwarriorx, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10The actual deal was more along the lines of "we promise not to sue each other over patent infringments in our software" than linux specifically. That's why they're technically not violating the GPL. Though obviously in spirit they are.
- TunaFisu, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Because they got paid a load of cash....
- init100, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1cyberwarriorx:
"The actual deal was more along the lines of "we promise not to sue each other over patent infringments in our software" than linux specifically. That's why they're technically not violating the GPL."
I don't think so. The reason they are technically not violating the GPL is because they agreed not to sue each others' customers. They are still free to sue each other.
- derekstech, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2Justin Steinman, needs his head checked; lets tell Novell we are going to help them, then Kill them with bad PR.
- skyscape, on 10/11/2007, -17/+1M$ is right. Who the heck is Novell to mess with Microsoft?
- init100, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Interesting, someone abbreviating Microsoft as M$ is defending them.
- init100, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Interesting, someone abbreviating Microsoft as M$ is defending them.
- gafasiesornivek, on 10/11/2007, -18/+3Hi everyone, I'm Steve Jobs. I just wanted to take this opportunity to mention how much of a total asswipe I am and remind everyone to purchase gerbils. They are truly your best friend. Have a nice day,
Steve Jobs - deadowl, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10"I want to make it extremely clear. We do not think there are any IP violations in Linux," he declared
I would have said, "I want to make it extremely clear. We believe that there are absolutely no IP violations in Linux."- trogdor282, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11We want to make this absolutely clear. We will definitely continue to not not make vague statements forever.
- ss1958, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13To me it reads like this: "We don't think there are any infringements, but if you do, you should be our customer, because we've positioned ourselves to profit from the impression that there are infringements."
- williamdyer, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10This is just asinine. This is like Novell's management tatooing on their foreheads: "We sign ***** contracts with predatory competitors."
An agreement not to sue is substantive. It had to be on the term sheet for the contract. So if it is meaningless, why sign it?? Stupid stupid stupid. - digitalranger, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12Someone explain this to me. Novell pay an obscene amount for what can only be described as protection money for Microsoft's FUD racket, yet they say they don't believe there are any "IP violations" (an oxymoron in itself).
If they actually believe that, why did they pay up to the FUD racket?
--
Business rule #23: Don't sign up for deals with companies whose name describe their CEO's genitalia, unless they're in the adult entertainment business. - Zuggy, on 10/11/2007, -7/+12I like how everyone who hates Microsoft listens to them about the patent deal. Read the whole article. Novell didn't do this for lawsuit protection because they can just as easily sue Microsoft customers for patent infringement, they did it to increase interoperability between Linux and Windows. Business wise this makes sense.
And before I get any MS lover replies, I'm posting this from Ubuntu, my primary OS- digitalranger, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5I appreciate the point you're making. Although if that's *all* it is then why is Ballmer rattling the FUD saber around every chance he gets?
To answer your question, why are people who dislike Microsoft taking notice? What they're doing is responding to what they see as simple FUD, and are simply calling him/them out on it. - init100, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0"they did it to increase interoperability between Linux and Windows."
Microsoft should not need any agreement to increase interoperability. The source is out there, so they can verywell look up how to interoperate themselves.
No, I rather think that Microsoft did not want interoperability, while Novell did. Novell approached Microsoft about interoperability and virtualization, and Microsoft saw an opportunity to spread some FUD. Thus, they agreed to sign an interoperability agreement if and only if Novell would sign a patent cooperation agreement too. To laymen, that looks like an admission of infringement, which Microsoft promptly started using by claiming that Linux users "owe them money". - generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1sorry, MS itself is the only barrier to interoperability. Ever hear of a little project called Samba ?
All the big developers of that project LEFT Novell.
- digitalranger, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5I appreciate the point you're making. Although if that's *all* it is then why is Ballmer rattling the FUD saber around every chance he gets?
- TheWriteGuy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Dear Justin:
Maybe you guys should return Microsoft's "protection money" and absolve yourselves of this so-called "partnership". - BlackAdderIII, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6"""lets tell Novell we are going to help them, then Kill them with bad PR"""
That's probably the most succinct description of Ballmer's "Sign 'n' Slander" strategy I've heard in a while. - InsaneGeek, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1I am absolutely positive there are lots and lots of patent infringements in Linux. Look at all the companies that are getting bombarded by lawsuits for patent infringements (I think MS themselves is getting one every other month as of late) and they have acres of lawyers combing the books trying to find them before hand. It would be extremely short-sighted and stupid to believe that Linux doesn't have any, I don't know if there are any MS ones, but to say it in a general statement... well that's very naive.
The bigger question is what does it mean when some company really steps forward and decides they want to actually push the issue in a court rather than in the news media. I'm not really quite sure where the exposure levels are, but I think it would be interesting to find out: if you are an individual developer and giving away the code and not even charging for support, a company that paid employees to create the code and distributes it and charges support (Redhat, Suse, etc), you work for the end company that uses the code in their product. What your legal liability touch points really are for each of the different areas.- init100, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Remember that F/OSS is a world-wide community, while only a few countries allow software patents. Thus, F/OSS can only infringe in those few countries (e.g. USA, Japan and Sweden).
- init100, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Remember that F/OSS is a world-wide community, while only a few countries allow software patents. Thus, F/OSS can only infringe in those few countries (e.g. USA, Japan and Sweden).
- Nocterminus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I wonder if Microsoft is feeling threatened by the new generation of nix distros that are so easy to use that companies like Dell are starting to offer it and they want to introduce FUD to discourage any business from adopting it for fear of legal problems?
I've been using kubuntu for over a year and find no practical reason to buy vista. - UniquelyUnique, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6MIcrosoft: Listen Novell, you've lost credibility. Tell ya what. I'll make some outrageous claim that threatens all linuxdom.
Novell: And I'll come out against your claim. Like I'm not your bought-and-paid-for bitch. It's brilliant. They'll never suspect. - deadbaby, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4How can Microsoft not realize what a terrible idea this is? Even people who have zero interest in using Linux respect its right to exist. Microsoft is making the same mistake the MPAA/RIAA/etc are -- they are driving people towards alternatives by alienating consumers.
- Focher, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2If you want to read a very good article describing both Microsoft's strategy and also an accurate description of the Microsoft-Novell cross-licensing agreement, check out CNN Money's article by Roger Parloff at http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/05/28/100033867/index.htm
It addresses very well the dilemma Microsoft is now in with regards to its deal with Novell along with OSF's response.
What I think is very interesting on the legal front is whether Microsoft is already establishing a defense against IP infringement claims by publicly claiming there actually is IP infringement. One is the statute of limitations. If Microsoft already knows there are IP violations in open source software, they are legally obligated to pursue it within the statute of limitations. There is also a legal defense called laches which allows a defendant to argue that the plaintiff sat on their rights and therefore there is no liability. - farm3r, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1What is the point of having a law that everybody infringes but nobody gets sued for (see reservations of M$ for not suing and "Patent Wars")?
- Myztry, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0And what's the point of having Nuclear Weapons if no one uses them? Control by fear. If Microsoft truly started a patents war, it would be annihilated also. The likes of IBM have a much larger arsenal at their disposal. And they are behind the the OIN (http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/) who's purpose is basically to counter-strike the patent war starters. Cyber World War 3 anyone?
- daftman, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2"We do not think there are any IP violations in Linux,"
THINK??
Not good enough. Come back when you actually KNOW as in "I KNOW you are full of crap"- SVPirate, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4... and I KNOW Microsoft are full of crap too. Show us the evidence or get lost, Balmer!
- powerscroft, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0You can get a good overview of who said what and what the issues are at
Computerworld UK
http://www.computerworlduk.com/management/government-law/compliance/in-depth/index.cfm?articleid=521 - bloodguard, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Classic "Good Cop/Bad Cop". I'll bet some C-Level doofus at Microsoft crafted the press release and told Novell to bleat it out to the press.
- towski, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2I'd like to remind everyone: EVERYONE, even the pristine untouchable Google has heavy dealings with Microsoft. Don't be a Digg sheep and simple criticize Novell for having to play the same game as everyone else.
- generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Novell is a GNU/Linux distributer and is bound by the GPL; hundreds of other companies have contributed code under the GPL and Novell doesn't own it and can't enter into agreements that violate the GPL or soon the GPLv3. Sorry, I don't see the relation to Google.
- crossers, on 07/19/2008, -0/+0 "I want to make it extremely clear. We do not think there are any IP violations in Linux," he declared. but why he do not?
http://www.shpe-sac.org
http://www.ocflex.com/
http://www.trgovinca.org
http://www.chasr.org/
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content posted by Digg users is